> I have used linux on the desktop in some form or another
> since 1998. It works, trust me.
So have I, since 1998-1999. It never really "worked" as a desktop compared to windows. Never. Gnome 2 (the latest few versions) was the best they managed to get together. It was always borderline unusable, but it worked somehow. But the latest versions are literarily killing off all Desktop Linux achieved in the last 15 years.
Personally, I've had enough. The moment when no distro offers Gnome 2 any more, and when I'm forced to use Gnome3, Unity or Kde4, I'm going back to windows.
Do you find Gnome 2 more usable than KDE 3.5? It seems that each major version of both major DEs added new layers of abstraction that slowed things down, but I think the usability+features to performance ratio peaked with the last revision of KDE 3.5.
Still, I think it's a bit drastic to say you'll go back to Windows. I've been trying Unity on my (1080p) laptop just to give it a fair chance, and I agree it's not that great, but I can disable it and switch to Gnome 2 or a customized KDE4 and still be more productive than in Windows.
i moved to xfce4 when arch moved to gnome3, and so far i've been perfectly happy with it. one or two annoying bugs, but on the whole it's a very usable desktop environment.
So have I, since 1998-1999. It never really "worked" as a desktop compared to windows. Never. Gnome 2 (the latest few versions) was the best they managed to get together. It was always borderline unusable, but it worked somehow. But the latest versions are literarily killing off all Desktop Linux achieved in the last 15 years.
Personally, I've had enough. The moment when no distro offers Gnome 2 any more, and when I'm forced to use Gnome3, Unity or Kde4, I'm going back to windows.